SERVANT LEADERSHIP IN BOLIVIA:

A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF A

SERVANT LEADER IN MISSIONS

Elizabeth G. Driscoll Chavez

In memory of Dr. Meredythe Scheflen

who passed away August 23, 2011.

Copyright © 2012 by Elizabeth G. Driscoll Chavez

All rights reserved

ABSTRACT

Over 50 years ago, Dr. Meredythe Scheflen founded a large educational cooperative in

Santa Cruz, Bolivia that encompasses a group of evangelical Christian elementary and high

schools under the leadership of a member/employee-owned Board of Directors. Twenty years

later, she went on to found the first and only evangelical university in Bolivia. Preliminary

research on Dr. Scheflen‘s autobiography and interviews with her followers has revealed that she

fits the profile of a servant leader, displaying leadership behaviors that contributed to her unusual

cross-cultural success within the low-trust, male-dominant Latin American culture.1 A

phenomenological case study was done to determine if the servant leadership principles

established by a cross-cultural female founding leader persist over time in the Bolivian culture

after this leader is no longer leading the organization. Using a multi-level approach with current

leaders and organizational members, the presence or absence of organizational servant leader

behaviors in these organizations was first determined by administering the Organizational

Leadership Assessment (OLA)2. Subsequently, semi structured interviews with six individuals

from each organization were conducted to gain insight into their perceptions of present-day

servant leadership, trust, and gender influence as experienced within the framework of the

Bolivian culture. The phenomenological approach was chosen for this study to ―bring to the fore

the experiences and perceptions of individuals from their own perspectives, and therefore . . .

challenge structural or normative assumptions‖ 3 of theory and cultural dimensions. Both the

OLA results and the interview data confirmed the presence of servant leader behaviors within the

Universidad Evangelica Boliviana and the Rio Nuevo Educational Society 30 and 50 years after

their founding, respectively, highlighting the lasting influence that can be achieved even against

cultural odds through the application of genuine servant leadership as an essential part of

effective missionary methods.

1

INTRODUCTION

Dr. Meredythe Scheflen may never have risen in prominence within the ranks of

evangelical missiology, having never published scholarly articles or extensive treatises on the

theological dilemmas of strategic cross-cultural leadership. Yet, if there is any measure of

success, this humble lady, worthy of her honorary doctorate, achieved it by establishing what is

arguably the most influential evangelical endeavor in the South American country of Bolivia.

For over 55 years, Dr. Scheflen lived out her missionary calling by consistently

demonstrating the characteristics that have come to be associated with the theory of servant

leadership: Love, humility, altruism, vision, trust, empowerment, and service. As a single foreign

female commissioned in the 1950s to a traditionally low-trust culture entrenched in a

paternalistic worldview, her survival, much less her success, was improbable, as she was told by

at least one mission organization. However, her method of doing missions, true servant

leadership, along with an integral reliance upon God‘s grace and sovereign guidance, allowed

her to leave a legacy that continues to impact an entire country, imparting biblical truth and

principles which have changed the lives of thousands of children, young people, and

professionals each year for over 50 years.

Such methodology merits serious consideration, yet little research has been done that

bridges the gap between the academic fields of leadership and missiology. This article is an

effort to move in that direction while honoring the legacy of a true servant leader, Dr. Meredythe

Scheflen.

Although cross-cultural leadership studies have grown in scope and importance in our

increasingly globalized society, there has been little attempt to meld these studies with current

evangelical mission work. However, leadership theory is, perhaps, as fundamental as theological,

2

sociological, and missiological studies in providing a theoretical framework from which to build

effective cross-cultural strategies. In discussing the impact of missionary methods on an

indigenous culture, it is necessary to address the leadership behaviors that missionaries employ

not only within their Western organizations but, more importantly, in relation to their co-workers

or followers from the target culture.

There is very little existent research linking missionaries (i.e. cross-cultural Christian

workers) to their leadership of indigenous or national colleagues. Notice, I say colleagues,

because too often the ‗sent‘ remain distant from the ‗served‘ and are seen as two distinct entities

with entirely separate leadership structures. While spending eighteen years on the mission field,

the social scientist in me observed many instances where foreign missionaries poured their heart

and soul into teaching, pastoring, evangelizing and even establishing ministries that were almost

completely void of direct input and cooperation from the very people they had come to serve.

Thus, the leader-follower relationship should be examined within the context of cross-cultural

missions.

In my study of leadership theory, it became evident that servant leadership has grown

recently as a popular Christian trend so much that it seems to be overused and little understood.

While many Christian workers profess to be servant leaders, very few really understand, or live

up to, the theoretical framework of this leadership model.

Furthermore, upon understanding the implications of laying aside traditional transactional

or hierarchical leadership models for one that gives up ones‘ rights, it seemed incongruent with

the culture in which I was serving in Bolivia. After all, in a society where high power distance

and low trust cultural dimensions predominated everyday life in very real oppression and distrust,

could it really be possible that servant leadership could be effective? Could it actually permeate

3

an organization and make a lasting change on individual followers over an extended period of

time?

If Jesus fits the model of servant leadership, according to current theory, then it seems

evident that his was a successful endeavor and left a lasting impact not only on his direct

disciples but also on generations that followed. Was this an exception, or could this leadership

model really be effective in modern cross-cultural missiology?

This article reports on the results of a phenomenological study on the lasting impact of

servant leadership behaviors on two educational organizations in Bolivia that were founded 30

and 50 years ago by the female foreign missionary educator, Dr. Meredythe Scheflen.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Servant Leadership

Servant leadership theory has been gaining importance over the past three decades within

the corporate business world as a viable alternative to hierarchical, transactional leader-follower

relationships. Formally developed by Robert K. Greenleaf in the 1970s, it was based upon

insights gained from reading Journey to the East, a book written by Herman Hesse. The book

tells the tale of a menial servant to a band of journeying men who, in the end, turned out to be a

great and effective leader. Greenleaf‘s4 proposition was that a great leader should first be a

servant to those he or she intends to influence.

Obviously, this falls directly in line with biblical theology as evidenced by Jesus‘

admonishment to model a different type of leadership than that which was prevalent in the

culture of the day:

You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials

exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great

4

among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave, just

as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom

for many. (Matt. 20:25-28, New International Version)

Based on Greenleaf‘s original writings, and in cooperation with Spears5 and others at The

Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, a list of 10 principle characteristics of servant

leadership was drawn up to include: Listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion,

conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of people, and building

community. In essence, servant leadership

emphasizes increased service to others, a holistic approach to work, promoting a sense of

community, and the sharing of power in decision making. At its core, servant leadership

is a long-term, transformational approach to life and work – in essence, a way of being –

that has the potential for creating positive change throughout our society. (Spears 1998: 3)

Other scholars have since developed variations of this original servant leadership model.

For the purpose of this study, Patterson‘s6 model was chosen because it has distilled the servant

leader characteristics into seven basic categories: (1) Agapao love, (2) humility, (3) altruism, (4)

vision, (5) trust, (6) empowerment of followers, and (7) service. It is important to note that all

servant leadership models include trust, or factors closely associated with trust, such as integrity

or credibility, as vital characteristics of servant leadership.7 As stated by Spears

8

There is a deep hunger in our society for a world where people truly care for one another,

where people are treated humanely and helped in their personal growth, where workers

and customers are treated fairly, and where our leaders can be trusted to serve the needs

of the many, rather than the few.

As Christian leaders, we promote servant leadership as foundational to our calling and

ministry. However, the test is in how our actions actually support our theory. Theologically, for

example, there is little debate that Jesus was the supreme model of servant leadership. His

actions undoubtedly define him as a servant leader even according to Patterson‘s model with the

5

characteristics of agapao love, humility, altruism, vision, trust, empowerment of followers, and

service.

The results of Jesus‘ servant leadership, even against all cultural norms, are evident. The

small group of 12 disciples who were closest to him went on to establish a world-wide religious

movement that continues to grow and impact lives today, over 2000 years since he actually lived

among us. Certainly, the Holy Spirit, divine intervention and the fulfilling of God‘s divine

purpose also has something to do with the success of Jesus‘ enterprise and, as we will see, the

combination of these same factors continues to work together harmoniously in the most

successful missions endeavors in present-day missiology.

Dr. Scheflen‘s leadership style

Dr. Meredythe Scheflen, by all accounts, was an unassuming Christian leader who

changed the educational systems of Bolivia on all levels. As a North American, single female

missionary, she spent over 55 years working side-by-side with national leaders to establish a

conglomerate of evangelical educational institutions that have served as the basis for a growing

Christian education movement throughout the country. Dr. Scheflen began her missionary

service by working with non-schooled elementary-age children in a remote jungle area. This

simple activity grew and gained momentum as classes from different years were added. Upon

moving to the city of Santa Cruz, she continued this endeavor in a local church. Again, as the

classes grew, the elementary school eventually expanded into one high school, then another, then

a Bible school, and finally led to the foundation of the first private evangelical university in

Bolivia. Such was her success that, over the years, graduates of these institutions went on to

establish many other evangelical schools around the country that continue to form and influence

generations of children and youth through quality education based on biblical principles.

6

Although she was never the leader of any mission organization, and rarely took on the highest

titles of leadership in the schools she founded, Dr. Scheflen was considered the founder and was

repeatedly honored by local schools, civic organizations, churches, and professional

organizations as well as the governments of both Bolivia and the United States.

What was the secret of her successful missionary career? Was it a strong overarching

strategy or vision that she carried from years of theological and missions formation? Research on

Dr. Scheflen‘s life and work showed that she consistently exhibited the very servant leadership

behaviors discussed earlier.9

Dr. Scheflen demonstrated agapao love

Dr. Scheflen made a great sacrifice and commitment to live and work among the people

she loved in Bolivia for over 50 years. Interviews with national believers confirmed that she

always ―expected the best from others, treating them with respect and genuine love, which

motivated them to work harder and follow her example.‖ 10

She was ―able to be everybody‘s

friend . . . if she went to the offices, she hugged everyone, asking how they were doing . . . and

everyone felt that she was more of a friend than a boss.‖11

Dr. Scheflen acted with humility

Her unpublished autobiography gives insight into how Dr. Scheflen was able to

accomplish what others may have considered impossible feats. Throughout the manuscript the

humility of her heart is evident as she gave credit to God‘s empowering as she dedicated her life

to serve God and others.

Whatever may have been accomplished in my labors here in Bolivia, it has not been by

personal merit, but by the combined impact of the influences, opportunities, and

experiences that the grace of God has made possible in my life. I am debtor to Christian

parents, to faithful professors, supportive friends, godly pastors, wholesome institutions,

and above all, to the transforming, enabling, and keeping power of God. (Scheflen 2003,

60)

7

Dr. Scheflen was altruistic

She demonstrated sacrificial, altruistic love for others by giving of her time and finances

above and beyond anyone‘s expectations. One example was how she would take chickens to

market late at night just to provide support for the budding University agricultural program.

Dr. Scheflen worked tirelessly for others even when much of the workload fell upon her

shoulders. She was said to treat people with their best interests at heart and not merely as a

means to an end. She often carried ―a full load of classes at the Bible Institute and serve[d] as

Academic Dean and Dean of Women, along with the direction of the Rio Nuevo School and the

new Berea Secondary School‖12

and commented that ―many times as we dropped wearily into

bed after still another trying day, we wondered if we would see another dawn.‖13

Dr. Scheflen was considered a visionary leader by her followers

Colleagues consistently commented that she could effectively communicate a vision in

such a way that others soon adopted it as if it had been their own. This was referred to as her

ability to ―look at a corn field and see a university.‖14

She has been a very good communicator of the visions that she dreamed. She would share

once, twice, three times—she didn‘t keep track of time when it came to communicating.

How many times did she stay up till the wee hours of the morning talking about her

dreams with the authorities; talking about her vision, her vision, her vision.15

Dr. Scheflen was trusting

Dr. Scheflen was characterized as having a high level of integrity, acting in a way that

was consistent with her beliefs regardless of whether her opinion was socially or politically

correct. ―She held to her beliefs because she had experienced them to be true.‖16

Dr. Scheflen empowered followers

She would entrust others with responsibility, showing that she believed in them and

trusted them to live up to that expectation. One follower commented, she ―believed in me and

8

gave me responsibilities and the opportunity to learn and grow as a leader.‖17

She respected

people and ―stimulated them to do their best. She (saw) the good in people and recognized it.‖18

Dr. Scheflen would encourage her followers by helping them to overcome obstacles,

believe in themselves and be optimistic about the future. One colleague said she ―learned [from

Dr. Scheflen] to be brave, to not be afraid to confront any situation.‖ She realized that ―if she can

do it why shouldn‘t I be able to as well?‖19

Dr. Scheflen was serving

Dr. Scheflen was known for her generosity and sacrificial service to all. ―She helped the

whole world. She shows interest in people and helps everyone who asks.‖20

Cultural Implications

Dr. Scheflen‘s experience highlights the possibility that there was something about her

that allowed her to overcome at least four basic cultural dimensions that should have been

working against her success:

1) She was a highly trusting individual in a low-trust society;

2) She was an individualistic outsider in a closed, collectivist environment;

3) She had little or no official status in a high power distance setting; and

4) She was a woman in a male-dominated machismo culture.

Trust

Trust is the glue that holds society together as members confidently rely upon each other

to work towards the common good. Fairholm defined trust as ―reliance on the integrity, or

authenticity, of other people . . . a logical, thoughtful hope in their reality, their authenticity, and

their truth.‖21

It is ―both an expectation and a personal obligation to be authentic, trustworthy,

and reliable… that helps define how and in what degree members value others.‖22

9

Latin America is considered a low-trust culture. 23

Part of this is due to the collectivistic

orientation that is suspicious of outsiders. It is also due to incessant abuse, corruption and

oppression by those in positions of power; positions that are not usually earned by one‘s merit or

capability but by the relationships or ‗who one knows‘. Furthermore, leaders often feel

entitlement at the expense of others, creating suspicion and distrust in their followers. This

distrust is felt at all levels and directly impacts leadership effectiveness.

Trust, however, is a central concept to many Western leadership theories, including

servant leadership. Followers constantly monitor their leaders‘ actions in order to determine

whether they are consistent in upholding the values and convictions they espouse through their

decisions and actions. Gaining trust in such an environment can prove nearly impossible, yet Dr.

Scheflen seemed to achieve an unusually high level of trust as she demonstrated self-sacrificial

service that was recognized as consistent with her espoused beliefs.

Collectivism

According to Hofstede‘s24

cultural dimensions, collectivism or familialism, is a

characteristic of societies that place an unusually high value on family and in-group ties; the only

people who are regularly trusted are members of the in-group or extended family. This results in

the exclusion and distrust of outsiders.

High power distance

High power distance25

is another cultural dimension that favors the acceptance of an

unequal distribution or access to power. It also contributes to the creation of a low-trust culture

by creating double standards, restricted social mobility, and suspicion of those with access to

resources. Organizations in such a society have a difficult time understanding, much less

enacting, servant leadership.

10

Gender

There is some support for the possibility that even in low-trust cultures, such as those in

Latin America, trust is more evident under the leadership of women.26

This could be because

they generally adopt a more participative leadership style.27

and less prone to corruption.28

In Latin America, although the macho image maintains a man‘s dignity, women are the

ones who provide care and nurture as well as carry much of the responsibility for the home

including the oversight of economic resources. Women may not always be at the forefront in

positions of leadership in machismo societies but they are often the influential driving force

behind the scenes. As a woman in a male-dominated society, Dr. Scheflen was able to exercise

leadership that included warm, altruistic love for her followers which, in turn, gained their love,

respect and trust. Servant leader behaviors, feminine traits of nurturing care, and being a

foreigner seemed to allow her to lead effectively in a low-trust culture by allowing her to show

altruistic love and transparent integrity that is not common in Bolivian leaders.

METHODOLOGY

The main purpose of this study was to determine if there was a lasting influence of these

servant behaviors on the organizations founded by Dr. Meredythe Scheflen in Bolivia between

30 and 50 years ago. The primary question addressed was: Do the servant leadership principles

established by a cross-cultural female founding leader persist over time in the Bolivian culture

after this leader is no longer leading the organization?

Two major educational institutions founded by Dr. Meredythe Scheflen, the Rio Nuevo

Educational Society and the Universidad Evangelica Boliviana (UEB) in Santa Cruz, Bolivia,

were included in the study. On the institutional level the Organizational Leadership Assessment

11

(OLA; Laub, 1999) was used to determine the current presence of servant leader behaviors. On

the individual level, in-depth interviews were conducted with six members from different levels

within each organization to determine whether or not they perceive servant leader behaviors in

their educational setting. All data was collected in person and in Spanish, the native language of

the participants.

Laub‘s Organizational Leadership Assessment (OLA) instrument29

was developed in an

attempt to identify servant leader behaviors within organization. It focuses on the leader–

organization relationship, based on the assumption that that leaders do not operate in a vacuum.

The six areas of organizational servant leadership examined in the OLA are: (a) values people, (b)

develops people, (c) builds community, (d) displays authenticity, (e) provides leadership, and (f)

shares leadership.

Six individuals were randomly chosen from each organization to respond to 12 open-

ended questions in a personal interview about their perceptions of the influence of servant leader

behaviors in the present-day organization, trust, gender issues, and the influence of the founder.

Those interviewed included two individuals representing each organizational level: top

leadership (top level of leadership), management (supervisors/ directors), and the general

workforce (staff members, teachers).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

OLA Data

The main outcome of the survey was the determination of a level of organizational health

in relation to servant leadership. Organizational health is reported as a power level, from 1 to 5,

which is indicative of the extent to which servant leadership is perceived to be practiced within

12

the organization. Org1 and Org2 power levels are considered Toxic and Poor Health,

respectively, and grouped as levels pertaining to Autocratic Leadership. Org3 and Org4, Limited

and Moderate Health, are indicative of Paternalistic Leadership, and Org5 and Org6 power levels,

Excellent and Optimal Health, refer to those organizations that report the perceived existence of

the highest level of the characteristics of servant leadership.30

The Rio Nuevo Educational Society was determined by the OLA to be a Level 4

organization under the category of Moderate Health. The majority of the respondents were from

the workforce level (n = 39), but there was representation from management (n = 2) and top

leadership (n = 2) positions as well.

Key patterns that were highlighted in the executive summary of OLA results for both the

Rio Nuevo Educational Society and the UEB were that both workers and leaders ―perceive the

Organization, as a whole, more positively than the leadership,‖31

and ―workers are looking for

more responsibility and authority to do their jobs.‖32

The Rio Nuevo Educational Society scored above the average score of all organizations

that have taken the OLA (n = 365) in all six areas that determine organizational health. The

scores were particularly high, nearly in the category of Excellent Health, for Value People and

Build Community. Although the scores did not place the educational society in the ranks of a

true servant leadership organization, it is apparent that it displays more servant leader

characteristics than most organizations. This is significant considering that most of the

organizations that have taken the OLA are not in the Latin American culture, with limited trust,

yet the educational society still outscored them.33

The UEB scored much closer or slightly below the average scores of all of the

organizations that have taken the OLA (n = 365). It was determined by the OLA to be a Level 3

13

organization under the category of Limited Health. While the UEB scored differently and lower

than the Rio Nuevo Educational Society, it is still important to note that this organization within

the Latin American cultural context has scored on par with other varied organizations from

around the world.34

Once again, although to a lesser degree than the Rio Nuevo Educational Society, the

strongest areas of organizational health at the UEB are also Value People and Build Community.

All of the other areas at both institutions were nearly equal and strong; however, it is interesting

to note that the weakest area for the UEB, according to the OLA, is the area Share Leadership.

Interview Data

Interviews were done with six individuals from each organization. Although these were

selected randomly, some care was given to get a diverse group of participants that would

represent not only each organizational level but also each gender and different age groups. These

were coded with letters and a number according to their organization, Rio Nuevo (RN) or

University (UEB). Each response to every question was then coded in depth with every phrase

being coded to multiple nodes or topic areas, such as feelings of belonging, expressions of

insecurity, fear, commitment to the organization, and frustration—to name just a few. These

were derived from the data itself and covered a wide gamut of subjects. After coding all of the

questions from each of the 12 interviews, these topic areas were distilled into themes that were

then categorized under the OLA leadership areas upon which they shed light. The result was an

overlapping of data from all questions that was related to many of the leadership areas.

For each servant leader characteristic, one or two interview questions were specifically

aimed at gathering data on individual responses regarding these characteristics.

Value People

14

Question 1: Explain how you feel valued in your organization as a person and/or for your

professional contributions.

Question 2: Explain how your needs and concerns are taken into account by the

leadership of the organization.

Of the six participants interviewed at the Rio Nuevo school system, all of them affirmed

they felt valued as a person and for their professional contributions to the organization. Four of

them mentioned they felt they had the support of all their supervisors and colleagues with one

saying expressly that she felt ―appreciated by all‖ (RN6).

Five of the six participants from the UEB also affirmed they felt valued although they

qualified their answers in different ways. For example, two interviewees said they felt valued ―by

some authorities, but not others‖ (UEB4, UEB5), and they thought the situation was better

―before‖ (UEB1). Another person felt the authorities just now valued her ―now that I‘m leaving‖

(UEB3), and two of the respondents mentioned they were at least verbally appreciated but they

did not see a corresponding response in action (UEB1, UEB3). They did not receive material

support for their job, expressed a lack of personal encouragement, and had not received financial

remuneration for increased responsibility (UEB4, UEB5). One individual responded negatively

that she did not feel valued at all, having been in the same position, receiving the same salary for

over 10 years in spite of constant attention to professional development (UEB5).

One of the leaders at the Rio Nuevo school system discussed how long- and short-term

plans were methodically prepared by the directors, approved by the General Assembly of

members, and then carefully followed to ensure that the needs of the organization and all

individuals within it were sufficiently met (RN1). Other interviewees affirmed this approach,

saying the ―leadership functions well‖ (RN3) and ―they are always ready to help with anything I

ask for, not denying anything, even economically‖ (RN5). One individual mentioned that

15

because of their sincere interest in the cause of Christian education, the leaders are supportive of

her initiatives and give her the freedom to carry out her plans (RN6). All respondents expressed

satisfaction that their personal financial needs were met.

People in both organizations felt there was a genuinely caring atmosphere among

colleagues and towards the students they work to serve. There was an effort in Rio Nuevo to help

each other with problems, to give advice when necessary, or to be attentive ―in order to

understand why a professor is sad‖ or has some unmet need (RN6). At the UEB, special concern

was shown on several occasions to individuals who were suffering illnesses associated with

stress. One individual expressed gratitude that, after taking a leave of absence for health reasons,

he was able to ―return to a place where [he] feels [he] can contribute to the University‖ (UEB2).

Share leadership

Question 3: Describe the relational atmosphere of your organization.

Question 4: Explain why you are willing or not willing to do what is necessary for the

organization whether it benefits you personally or not.

Overall, the individuals from both the Rio Nuevo Educational Society and the UEB

described a warm, caring atmosphere that is distinct from other workplaces they have

experienced, mainly because of the Christian heritage and extended family relationships that

have been nurtured over many years. They emphasized the fact that they ―get along just great,

like a family, just perfectly‖ (RN5). ―No one is a negative influence‖ and ―there is a good

relationship between people . . . like a family‖ (RN6). Although certain individuals may be less

enthusiastic than others, for the most part, there is a willingness to collaborate on projects and to

go beyond the expectations of a particular job description. It was mentioned that, as Christian

institutions, they differ from other organizations because people are not clamoring for the

position of others, trying to put people down, or ―fighting for power‖ (UEB3). One interviewee

16

said, ―since we are working with Christian colleagues, it is my perception that there is harmony,

at least in this office there is harmony . . . and this is quite different from the place I did my

internship‖ (UEB6).

Individuals at all levels in the Rio Nuevo school system felt that those who recognized

God‘s sovereignty in their lives showed humility and were ―willing to serve and to help us so

that we can do our best‖ (RN5).

I do not feel that I have special rights (as the child of a partner) . . . but I am

conscious that God put me here because this was not something that I sought but

that I had prayed about. I put everything in the Lord‘s hands and He will place me

wherever and whenever He wants. (RN4)

At the university, there was also a strong sense of calling to the job as a ministry as

expressed by one individual who said that ―as long as the Lord says, ‗this is your ministry, your

place,‘ then I must give it my all‖ (UEB2). Humility was also evident in comments about

realizing one is not indispensable and no one is perfect.

Things will continue to function even if you are not here. That doesn‘t mean that you

should do your work haphazardly; while you are here you should give your all. But you also

need to realize that we are just passing through and this passage should be transcendental so that

when we are gone they will remember us and say ―that person, yes, was effective.‖ What else are

we going to take with us? Nothing, right? I believe that is our satisfaction, having been able to

influence others. (UEB2)

Provide leadership

Question 5: Explain how the vision/mission of the organization is determined, carried out,

and shared with its members.

Question 6: Describe who or what has most influenced the present vision of your

organization.

17

The vision of the Rio Nuevo school system is ―Christ-centered‖ with ―all of the teaching

[centered] on the purpose that many can know the Lord‖ (RN6). One interviewee said, ―even

though the school is not 100% evangelical, there are many students accepting Christ and they do

not forget their instruction here‖ (RN5).

In the hiring process, prospective teachers are asked about their view on the purpose of

the school. They are expected to know that ―more than teaching knowledge, it is about planting

the Word of God, the Seed‖ (RN4). However, although the vision is purposefully ―imparted to

new personnel‖ (RN2), many still ―do not even know the mission . . . it is there on paper but very

few can say it‖ (RN4). Nonetheless, as the coordinator of spiritual life pointed out, ―even though

I don‘t worry about memorizing the vision, I know it . . . it is very clear for us‖ (RN6). ―It is

there implicitly‖ (RN4).

The interviewees at the UEB knew that it was also born with a clear vision and mission

―that throughout these 30 years has been carried out in good part‖ (UEB2). Many things have

been accomplished over this time in spite of the fact that early leadership was perceived to have

often acted ―on a whim‖ (UEB2). Whereas, ―before it was more heart, more desire to do things,

but without much planning‖ in the ―last 5 or 6 years, there is a more formal way of imparting the

mission and the vision‖ (UEB3).

Dr. Meredythe Scheflen, the founder of the Rio Nuevo Educational Society and the UEB,

was nearly unanimously mentioned as having a profound influence on the vision and mission of

the current organization. One person from Rio Nuevo said, ―the one who has had the most

influence is Miss Mery, very much influence. We have taken that, at least I have, as a long term

vision and we are managing to achieve it‖ (RN3). Similarly, another from the University

18

commented, ―Miss Mery, in the time when she was part of the executive body, was always

insisting on [it] and she really lived it!‖ (UEB4)

Display authenticity

Question 7: Explain how much you trust your leaders and feel that they trust you.

Question 8: Describe the level of transparency/authenticity in your organization as

compared to other organizations in Bolivia.

The individuals from the Rio Nuevo Educational Society felt there was a high degree of

trust among all levels of leaders and personnel within the system. For example, when asked if

she felt her leaders trusted her to make decisions, one individual responded, ―yes, yes, that is for

sure‖ (RN4). Others responded similarly with regard to trust saying that ―at the university, it was

felt that there is a degree of trust at most times, but ―it is not the norm‖ (UEB3).

In my department one of the main elements is trust . . . because it is possible to

falsify grades and no one would even know . . . So I believe they have a high

degree of trust in the work I am doing and any paper that I put on their desk they

sign because they know that I am doing well. (UEB4)

Although one individual stated, ―everything is very transparent‖ (RN5), another said,

―there isn‘t a lot of transparency in that they don‘t inform us directly of the decisions they make.

There isn‘t much communication that ‗this is what is happening‘ or ‗it is like this‘‖ (RN4).

Others clarified that it was not an issue of trust as much as frustration in not being included in the

decision-making process.

The UEB enjoys a distinct reputation of integrity within the general community. Within

the university itself, it was felt there was a high level of integrity particularly in dealing with

legal matters that oftentimes are considered optional within the general Bolivian culture.

There is a difference [from other institutions] . . . In talking about transparency,

we need we have to mention the image that we project to others as well. When we

19

celebrated 30 years, many authorities at the banquet spoke in favor of the

university, praising it in a way that reflects the image that it has. (UEB1)

Develop people

Question 9: Explain how you feel that you have been developed as a leader in your

organization.

Within the Rio Nuevo Educational Society, one of the ways mentioned for helping to

develop people was a keen understanding of individual abilities and interests. This was

particularly true regarding teachers and the level of their participation in school activities. There

was an attitude of appreciation for the encouragement of the directors and administration in

giving employees a sense of creativity for coming up with ideas that can be approved and carried

out.

Like the Rio Nuevo Educational Society, the UEB also had an environment where many

of the higher-level authorities had been there for a very long time. Many had come through the

school system and later moved into the university. A few worked together with the founder and

the original board in establishing the university 30 years ago. Others were second- or third-

generation leaders. Over the years, the UEB had cultivated these individuals by regularly placing

them in positions of increased responsibility.

I have developed myself here since I was a student, then an assistant, later head of

the laboratory . . . always advancing. (UEB2)

My professional growth has been very nice because I started as an hourly

professor, then part time, then full time, then department head, and later head of

investigation. My advancement has been gradual and in each step I had to learn

through trial and error because there wasn‘t any clear instruction on the

responsibilities of each role. (UEB3)

Build community

20

Question 10: Explain why you are committed or not committed to your organization.

Question 11: If someone offered you a similar position at a different/competing

institution would you accept? Why or why not?

The environment at the Rio Nuevo school system was often referred to as a family

atmosphere. ―We get along really well, just like a family‖ (RN5). ―One of the best things about

this institution is that the older people are like our parents, giving us a sermon like a father‖

(RN6).

The situation at Rio Nuevo was unique because not only are many of the society

members still active in the school system but their children and even grand-children are students,

teachers, and even directors. It was considered to be a close-knit community of Christians whose

families have become intertwined over the course of the past 50 years.

As far as intentions to leave or the willingness to move on if offered a similar position in

another organization, no one expressed any desire to do this unless he or she felt it was clearly a

new direction from God. ―To work in another institution? No, I would only consider leaving in

order to spend more time with my family‖ (RN2).

At the UEB, commitment meant being willing to do anything for the institution even

when there would be no personal benefit gained. ―I love the university and everything here . . .

because I see it as a service and I have really seen lives changed . . . I would give everything for

her, even though I don‘t feel personally benefitted‖ (UEB5). Part of the reason for such loyalty

and dedication at the UEB was because of a commitment to the original founder.

Yes, I am totally committed to the university. I feel that it is my second home. . . .

I have my house nearby and do everything thinking of this institution. It is

something that we founded with Miss Mery, my spiritual mother. I must

accompany her until the end. (UEB1)

21

When asked about the possibility of leaving if offered a similar position, there were

mixed responses. ―No, no that would be a lack of loyalty,‖ said one teacher who confessed that

once, when offered the opportunity to teach a course elsewhere, she was ―torn by her conscience‖

about it and finally turned them down (UEB1).

Leader as servant

Since this study sought to determine the perception of the presence of servant leader

behaviors within the Rio Nuevo Educational Society and the UEB, two additional questions were

included in the interviews specifically for this purpose.

Question 12: Have you seen servant leadership modeled in your organization? Please

describe.

Question 13: Describe a model leader from your organization.

Responses were vague and unspecific from individuals in the Rio Nuevo school system,

as if there was uncertainty as to exactly what servant leadership meant. In considering a model

leader, one respondent spoke about everyone on the board being Christians, ―although some with

more conservative ideas than others‖ (RN2). One said she had not ―seen it much because most

people expect to be served and expect personal benefits more than serving others‖ (RN4). A

model leader to her would be ―giving completely of oneself . . . not in search of personal benefit.

Giving more time, not in the sense of just being here, but in giving all of one‘s time by giving the

best of oneself‖ (RN4).

One individual at the UEB discussed how it was necessary for leaders to demonstrate

humility, recognizing one‘s weaknesses and errors, in order to gain the respect of others that

would qualify him or her as a servant leader. In response to being asked to name a model leader,

the most frequently mentioned was Dr. Meredythe Scheflen,

22

who is my star. There are many things about her that I admire. I don‘t know if

someday I will ever be like her, but I admire her. I see her as a light. I consider

her to be a servant leader, totally surrendered at the feet of the Lord. (UEB3)

Throughout all of the interviews, characteristics were expressed that led to a description

of the culture of valuing people at the Rio Nuevo school system and the UEB. One of these

characteristics was the repeated expression of the willingness of individuals to serve others. As

one individual said, ―we are here to serve, not to be served, so we should take this position and

attitude towards other people‖ (RN1). This type of service often stemmed from a profound

expression of a sense of calling by God to this place and work. More than one person claimed to

―put everything in the Lord‘s hands‖ (RN4), therefore, giving completely of oneself to the

institution.

People in both organizations felt there was a genuinely caring atmosphere among

colleagues and towards the students they work to serve. There was an effort in Rio Nuevo to help

each other with problems, to give advice when necessary, or to be attentive ―in order to

understand why a professor is sad‖ or has some unmet need (RN6).

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this study was to determine the lasting influence of a female cross-

cultural servant leader on the organizations she founded over 50 years ago. As corroborated by

both the Organizational Leadership Assessment (OLA) and personal interviews with

organization members, there is strong evidence that servant leadership characteristics are still

present within both organizations founded by the Dr. Meredythe Scheflen. The overall positive

result in each of the six areas of organizational health is indicative of the persistence of the

influence of servant leadership upon both the Rio Nuevo Educational Society and the UEB.

23

Although there are differences and deficiencies in each area, as with any organization, overall,

and against the Bolivian low-trust cultural context, the results indicate that there has been an

enduring effect of Dr. Meredythe Scheflen‘s founding leadership upon these organizations.

It is posited, therefore, that there is an increasing need to understand successful cross-

cultural and servant leadership in the global context specifically within the field of missiology.

Validating that servant leader behaviors have the ability to be passed down over time in a low-

trust society testifies to the effectiveness of this method of doing missions even where outsiders

may otherwise be unable to leave an enduring legacy. May all those who serve in the capacity of

missionaries consider whether their leadership truly reflects the characteristics of a servant leader

according to the model discussed here.

Endnotes

1. Elizabeth Chavez. Effective Cross-Cultural Leadership: An Autobiographical Case Study of

an Authentic Female Leader in Latin America. Unpublished manuscript,(Regent

University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship, Virginia Beach, VA., 2006).

2. James Laub. OLA Group Organizational Levels. OLA Group. Accessed from

http://www.olagroup.com/Display.asp?Page=organizational_levels.

3. S. Lester. An Introduction to Phenomenological Research. (1999). Accessed from

http://www.sld.demon.co.uk/resmethy.pdf

4. Robert K. Greenleaf. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and

Greatness (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1977).

5. Larry Spears. ―Reflections on Robert K. Greenleaf and Servant-Leadership.‖ Leadership &

Organization Development Journal 17, (1996): 33-35.

6. Kathleen Patterson. ―Servant leadership: A Theoretical Model.‖ Dissertation Abstracts

International 64, no. 02 (2003): 570.

7. R. Dennis & B.E. Winston. ―A Factor Analysis of Page and Wong‘s Servant Leadership

Instrument.‖ Leadership & Organization Development Journal 24, no.8 (2003): 455-459;

M.L Farling, A.G. Stone, & B.E.Winston, B. E. ―Servant Leadership: Setting the Stage

for Empirical Research.‖ The Journal of Leadership Studies 6 (1999):49-72; R.C. Liden,

24

S.J. Wayne, H. Zhao, & D. Henderson. ―Servant Leadership: Development of a

Multidimensional Measure and Multilevel Assessment.‖ The Leadership Quarterly 19

(2008): 161-177; James Laub. ―Assessing the Servant Organization: Development of the

Servant Organizational Leadership (SOLA) Instrument.‖ Dissertation Abstracts

International 60, no. 02 (1999): 308; D. Page & T. Wong. ―A Conceptual Framework for

Measuring Servant-Leadership.‖ In S. Adjibolosoo (Ed.), The Human Factor in Shaping

the Course of History and Development (pp. 1-16). Lanham, MD: University Press of

America, 2000; S. J. Reinke. ―Service Before Self: Towards a Theory of Servant

Leadership.‖ Global Virtue Ethics Review 5, no. 3 (2004): 30-57; R.F. Russell & A.G.

Stone. ―A Review of Servant Leadership Attributes: Developing a Practical Model.‖

Leadership and Organization Development Journal 23, no. 3 (2002): 145-157; Patterson.

8. Larry Spears. Insights on Leadership: Service, Stewardship, Spirit, and Servant-Leadership.

(New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1998: 11).

9. Chavez

10. Ibid, 47.

11. A. Zabalo, Interview by author. 16 March 2006. Bolivia. Digital recording.

12. Meredythe Scheflen. Hitherto/Yesterday, Herewith/Today, Henceforth/Tomorrow: An

Educational Odyssey. Unpublished manuscript (2003): 21.

13. Ibid, 27.

14. Zabalo

15. Luis Zeballos. Interview by author. 22 April 2006. Bolivia. Digital recording.

16. Chavez, 44.

17. Roberto Anez. Interview by author. 6 August 2006. Bolivia. Digital recording.

18. Zabalo

19. Chavez, 45.

20. Zabalo

21. G.W. Fairholm. Leadership and the Culture of Trust. (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994) 97.

22. Ibid

23. F. Fukuyama. ―Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda.‖ SAIS Review 22, no.

1 (2002): 23-37.

24. Geert Hofstede. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and

Organizations across Nations 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002).

25

25. Ibid.

26. Karen Klenke. ―Gender Influences in Decision-Making Processes in Top Management

Teams.‖ Management Decision 41, no. 10 (2003): 1024+.

27. As suggested by A.H. Eagly & M.C. Johannesen-Schmidt ―The Leadership Styles of Women

and Men‖. Journal of Social Issues 57, no.4 (2001): 781+; C.S. Rosenthal. When Women

Lead: Integrative Leadership in State Legislatures (New York, NY: Oxford University

Press, 1998); and T.L.Simons ―Behavioral Integrity as a Critical Ingredient for

Transformational Leadership.‖ Journal of Organizational Change Management 12, no. 2

(1999): 89.

28. According to M. Henderson. All Her Paths are Peace: Women Pioneers in Peacemaking.

(West Hartford, CT: Kumarian Press, 1994) and K.R. Martin ―‘From the Heart of a

Woman‘: Yucatec Maya Women as Political Actors.‖ Sex Roles: A Journal of Research

39, no.7-8 (1998): 559.

29. Laub. OLA Group Organizational Levels.

30. James Laub. Organizational Leadership Assessment Evaluation Report for Sociedad

Educativa Rio Nuevo Ltd. (West Palm Beach, FL: OLAGroup, 2010).

31. Ibid, 31.

32. James Laub. Organizational Leadership Assessment Evaluation Report for Universidad

Evangelica Boliviana (West Palm Beach, FL: OLAGroup, 2010): 3.

33. Laub. Organizational Leadership Assessment Evaluation Report for Sociedad Educativa Rio

Nuevo Ltd.

34. Laub. Organizational Leadership Assessment Evaluation Report for Universidad Evangelica

Boliviana.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

26

Burns, J. M. Leadership. New York, NY: Harper and Row, 1978.

Chavez, E. Effective Cross-Cultural Leadership: An Autobiographical Case Study of an

Authentic Female Leader in Latin America. Unpublished manuscript, Regent University

School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship, Virginia Beach, VA., 2006.

Dennis, R., & Winston, B. E. ―A Factor Analysis of Page and Wong‘s Servant Leadership

Instrument.‖ Leadership & Organization Development Journal 24, no.8 (2003): 455-459,

2003.

Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. ―The Leadership Styles of Women and Men‖.

Journal of Social Issues 57, no.4 (2001): 781+.

Fairholm, G. W. Leadership and the Culture of Trust. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994.

Farling, M. L., Stone, A. G., & Winston, B. E. ―Servant Leadership: Setting the Stage for

Empirical Research.‖ The Journal of Leadership Studies 6 (1999):49-72.

Fry, L. W. ―Toward a Theory of Spiritual Leadership.‖ The Leadership Quarterly 14, no.6

(2003): 693-727.

Fukuyama, F. ―Social Capital and Development: The Coming Agenda.‖ SAIS Review 22, no. 1

(2002): 23-37.

Greenleaf, Robert K. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and

Greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1977.

Greenleaf, Robert K. Servant Leadership: A Journey into the Nature of Legitimate Power and

Greatness (25th anniversary ed.). New York, NY: Paulist Press, 2002.

Harris, J. I. ―The King as Public Servant: Towards an Ethic of Public Leadership based on

Virtues Suggested in the Wisdom Literature of the Older Testament.‖ Journal of

Theology for Southern Africa 113 (2002): 61.

Henderson, M. All Her Paths are Peace: Women Pioneers in Peacemaking. West Hartford, CT:

Kumarian Press, 1994.

Hofstede, Geert. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and

Organizations across Nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

Joseph, E. E., & Winston, B. E. ―A Correlation of Servant Leadership, Leader Trust,and

Organizational Trust.‖ Leadership and Organizational Development Journal 26, no.1

(2005): 6-22.

Klenke, Karen. ―Gender Influences in Decision-Making Processes in Top Management Teams.‖

Management Decision 41, no. 10 (2003): 1024+.

27

Laub, James. ―Assessing the Servant Organization: Development of the Servant Organizational

Leadership (SOLA) Instrument.‖ Dissertation Abstracts International 60, no. 02 (1999):

308.

Laub, James. OLA Group Organizational Levels. OLA Group. Accessed from

http://www.olagroup.com/Display.asp?Page=organizational_levels.

Laub, James. Organizational Leadership Assessment Evaluation Report for Sociedad Educativa

Rio Nuevo Ltd. West Palm Beach, FL: OLAGroup, 2010.

Laub, James. Organizational Leadership Assessment Evaluation Report for Universidad

Evangelica Boliviana. West Palm Beach, FL: OLAGroup, 2010.

Lester, S. An Introduction to Phenomenological Research. (1999). Retrieved from

http://www.sld.demon.co.uk/resmethy.pdf

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. ―Servant Leadership: Development of a

Multidimensional Measure and Multilevel Assessment.‖ The Leadership Quarterly 19

(2008): 161-177.

Martin, K. R. ―‘From the Heart of a Woman‘: Yucatec Maya Women as Political Actors.‖ Sex

Roles: A Journal of Research 39, no.7-8 (1998): 559.

Page, D., & Wong, T. ―A Conceptual Framework for Measuring Servant-Leadership.‖ In S.

Adjibolosoo (Ed.), The Human Factor in Shaping the Course of History and

Development (pp. 1-16). Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2000.

Patterson, K. ―Servant leadership: A Theoretical Model.‖ Dissertation Abstracts International 64,

no. 02 (2003): 570.

Reinke, S. J. ―Service Before Self: Towards a Theory of Servant Leadership.‖ Global Virtue

Ethics Review 5, no. 3 (2004): 30-57.

Rosenthal, C. S. When Women Lead: Integrative Leadership in State Legislatures. New York,

NY: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Russell, R. F. ―Exploring the Values and Attributes of Servant Leaders.‖ Dissertation Abstracts

International 61, no.12 (2001): 4856.

Russell, R. F. ―The Role of Values in Servant Leadership.‖ Leadership and Organization

Development Journal 22, no. 2 (2001): 76-89.

Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. ―A Review of Servant Leadership Attributes: Developing a

Practical Model.‖ Leadership and Organization Development Journal 23, no. 3 (2002):

145-157.

Scheflen, Meredythe. Hitherto/Yesterday, Herewith/Today, Henceforth/Tomorrow: An

Educational Odyssey. Unpublished manuscript, 2003.

28

Simons, T. L. ―Behavioral Integrity as a Critical Ingredient for Transformational Leadership.‖

Journal of Organizational Change Management 12, no. 2 (1999): 89.

Solheim, B. O. On Top of the World: Women’s Political Leadership in Scandinavia and Beyond.

Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2000.

Spears, Larry. ―Reflections on Robert K. Greenleaf and Servant-Leadership.‖ Leadership &

Organization Development Journal 17, (1996): 33-35.

Spears, Larry. Insights on Leadership: Service, Stewardship, Spirit, and Servant-Leadership.

New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1998.

Spears, Larry. ―Servant-Leadership.‖ Executive Excellence 15, no. 7 (1998): 11.

Washington, R., Sutton, C., & Field, H. ―Individual Differences in Servant Leadership: The

Roles of Values and Personality.‖ Leadership & Organization Development Journal 27,

no. 8 (2006): 700-716.

Winston, Bruce E. Extending Patterson’s Servant Leadership Model: Coming Full Circle.

Proceedings of the Servant Leadership Research Roundtable, Regent University, School

of Leadership Studies, Virginia Beach, VA. (2003). Retrieved from

http://www.regent.edu/acad/cls/2003ServantLeadership Roundtable/

Yukl, G. Leadership in Organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle Creek, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002.